Is Ron Paul getting too much media attention?

Appearances by Ron Paul over the past several days in New Hampshire have been jammed, to the point where one crucial stop degenerated into chaos.

Stephan Savoia/AP
GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul is swarmed by members of the media after visiting a restaurant in Manchester, N.H., on Monday.

Ron Paul followers have long complained their guy does not get enough media coverage. They echo the words of comedian Jon Stewart, who last August pointed out that reporters generally ignored Representative Paul following his second-place finish in the Ames, Iowa, straw poll. “How did libertarian Ron Paul became the 13th floor of a hotel?” Mr. Stewart asked on his “Daily Show.”

Well, Paul’s the main lobby now. A media horde follows him everywhere. Is he getting too much press attention – so much that it's interfering with his ability to get out his preferred campaign message?

On one level, the answer to that is obviously “yes.” Paul’s appearances over the past several days in New Hampshire have been jammed, to the point where one crucial stop degenerated into chaos.

Paul seemed “overwhelmed” by the madness at a morning event at Moe Joe’s diner in Manchester on Monday, according to CNN political reporter Dana Bash.

Paul circulated some in the room, but eventually he and his wife, Carol, were forced to retreat because of the media scrum. Cameras followed them outside and surrounded their black SUV. One voter pounded on the vehicle’s windows, pleading for Paul to come back inside. A heckler called Paul “chicken” and played the chicken dance song on portable electronic equipment.

“The scene rendered Paul’s SUV immobile for about 5 minutes – until his security was forced to move everyone out of the way,” said an ABC News account of the incident.

Paul’s campaign apologized for the incident in a post on his website. The statement noted that Mrs. Paul got shoved by a cameraman and claimed that 120 reporters had created a moblike atmosphere.

“The campaign had planned to cover our normal degree of media interest, which is always ample. However, a significant increase in the press corps, largely driven by an influx of foreign journalists, exceeded all expectations,” said the Paul statement.

Should Paul really be blaming this on “foreign” journalists? And were they foreign in the sense that they’re from another country, or are they fresh troops reassigned from the Bachmann beat?

Anyway, the real point is that this is a bad time for Paul’s campaign machine to develop problems. Monday was the last campaign day in New Hampshire, where Paul is projected to finish in second place, and meet-and-greets have been crucial to Paul’s appeal everywhere.

As New York Times polling analyst Nate Silver notes on Tuesday, Mitt Romney’s and Paul’s share of the vote has remained stable in a volatile year – in part because of the skill of their organizations.

“Mr. Romney and Mr. Paul have built the best field operations in New Hampshire and other early-voting states, many Republicans say,” writes Mr. Silver on his FiveThirtyEight blog.

The harsh scrutiny of the media could be damaging to Paul on a more abstract level, as well. The press is like a searchlight: It has a narrow focus, but when it shines on you, it can be blinding. In recent weeks, media reports of racist language in old newsletters printed under Paul’s name have angered his campaign and reminded voters of an old controversy involving the libertarian.

Reports have also focused on Paul’s refusal to completely disavow any intention to run as a third-party candidate, or his refusal to promise to support any eventual Republican nominee in the fall. This has caused some conservatives to begin to grumble about Paul’s continued participation in the GOP process.

“Having thus used the GOP’s brand and standing to hoard a metric ton of attention for himself, the very least he could do, even if he could not bring himself to promise to support the eventual GOP nominee, would be to promise not to run against the GOP’s nominee under the banner of some other party,” wrote contributor Leon Wolf on the conservative RedState blog on Monday.

Meanwhile, Paul is continuing to do OK in polls. A new CBS survey finds a hypothetical race between Paul and Barack Obama as a statistical tie, with Paul the choice of 45 percent of respondents and Obama the choice of 46 percent. Among Republican candidates, only Romney does better: He leads Mr. Obama 47 to 45 percent in CBS’s findings.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.